n either House, _but I have every reason to think
that they would have done it, if there had been the smallest
prospect of success in the attempt_. You must observe that the
vote of the House of Commons is much weaker than that of the
Lords; Gardiner was obliged, by the interference of Government's
friends, to omit several expressions which, if they had been
retained, would have rendered the vote more just to your
Lordship's Administration, but would have occasioned debate. The
fact is, that no compliment to the Act of Renunciation, or even
to the framer of it, can be borne with patience by certain
supporters of the present Castle.

And in the report of his own speech on this occasion, which accompanies
the letter, Lord Mornington plainly charges the Government with
duplicity in reference to Lord Temple's system of economy. Referring to
a passage in the Lord-Lieutenant's speech, where his Excellency, in
recommending the establishment of the Genevans, reminded Parliament of
their duty to "avoid _unnecessary expense_," his Lordship expresses a
hope that in "other cases, where all profusion would be dangerous, and
where the public safety demanded the most rigid economy, _in the
establishments of Government, his Excellency would think it_ HIS _duty
to avoid all unnecessary expense_;" and then, comparing the
recommendation respecting the Genevans with another passage where his
Excellency applied for a supply, and in which "his Excellency's economy
made no appearance," Lord Mornington goes on to say:

Comparing the two passages of the speech, he [Lord Mornington]
was apt to imagine that the expression, "unnecessary expense,"
was dictated by another spirit, and with other views, than of
saving to the public: he suspected that it was meant to
insinuate by so special, and seemingly superfluous a
recommendation of economy in the further progress of the
establishment of the Genevans, that there had been some neglect
of economy in the original foundation of the scheme; if that was
meant, he called upon the confidential servants of the Castle to
avow it; if not, he insisted that they should do justice to the
personage who had originally framed this plan, and disclaim his
construction of this ambiguous phrase. _He knew what had been
the language of the Castle on this subject; he knew how this
scheme had been decried; and what a damp